PDA

View Full Version : Tinsley's contract



Ragnar
10-29-2004, 10:30 AM
Uh they are negotiating with him right now.

Natston
10-29-2004, 10:33 AM
Uh they are negotiating with him right now.

ChicagoJ
10-29-2004, 10:34 AM
Welcome, and calm down... :cool:

JT is on his rookie contract, of course he's a bargain.

As has been widely reported, they are in negotiations. They've got until Sunday. It will happen. Or if it doesn't, it will be because Tinsley wants to test the FA waters next summer.

Ragnar
10-29-2004, 10:44 AM
Trust me JTshomeboy no one on here will be more pissed if they dont work someting out with Tinsley. If he ends up leaving as a free agent next year, I will post something that the admins will have to ban me for.

Kegboy
10-29-2004, 11:23 AM
:confused:

Anyway, as has been pointed out many times in the press, Donnie doesn't let rookies go. Nothing to worry about.
---
Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

"What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.

Hicks
10-29-2004, 12:14 PM
Trust me JTshomeboy no one on here will be more pissed if they dont work someting out with Tinsley. If he ends up leaving as a free agent next year, I will post something that the admins will have to ban me for.

If that happens (he leaves), I think I'll just have to create a sticky thread called "***** About Tinsley Leaving Here" and let people go nuts :laugh:

MagicRat
10-29-2004, 02:39 PM
In all likelihood, they'll let him test the restricted free agent waters. WIth the CBA one year closer to expiring next year, I think you'll find GM's much more hesitant to give out huge long term contracts, especially to player who average 28 minutes a game and score 8 pts per game. Though those numbers need to (and should) uptick this year, it still doesn't change the fact that the Pacers, given the CBA situation, may be better off letting TInsley see what some other team would offer him. Besides, they could match it if they wanted since he would be a RFA.

Good one, Nostradamus.......:p

Fool
10-29-2004, 02:56 PM
Unless they got him on the cheap and expect his numbers to go up this year. In that case they signed him for as cheap as they will ever get him and now have him for two more years.

Arcadian
10-29-2004, 03:09 PM
Maybe, Tins wanted 6 years and didn't want think he could get it after the new CB? Maybe, he didn't want to have the stress of a lock out and having to get a contract the same summer?

This most likely the last time a player will be able to get 6 yrs. If Tins thought the money was enough why not take the security.

On the Pacers' part if they believe in Tins signing him for 6 yrs will be cheaper most likely than trying to sign him two two four year contracts because there is no outside bidding or inflation.

Also if contracts get shorter I think players are going to get higher salaries or percent increases. I could be wrong on that though.

ChicagoJ
10-29-2004, 03:10 PM
Its expected that the next round of CBA will result in a shorter maximum-length contract. We've been hearing whispers of three or four years, maximum.

DW has a long history of using long contracts to ensure that a small-market team can keep its players/ maintain stability. He's been willing to overpay to get players to sign maximum-length deals.

If he wanted to lock up Tinsley for as long as he can, it did make sense to do the deal right now. Otherwise, btown, you're probably right.

Anthem
10-29-2004, 03:18 PM
I'm fine with locking him up for as long as possible.

Pending the money, of course.